Bill and Paul made about $100 billion and their bugs have become the standard that most "standards" can't dislodge.
Anyone can proclaim a "standard", recall what "RFC" stands for? It's not "peer-reviewed and passed by governing bodies."
If Mozilla is saying this is how they're building it into the code base, W3C can ignore it, but it's W3C who won't be compatible with what is standard.
The reason tungsten filaments have any appreciable lifetime at all, instead of just vaporizing themselves like carbon or nickel or any of the other 5,997 materials eventually rejected, is that tungsten filaments self-repair any imperfections.
If a pit forms in the filament surface, the convexities start to ablate into a vapor, and the concavities start to collect atoms from the vapor. The crater becomes a depression, then a dip, then disappears.
In other materials the concentration of electric current and resultant heating around the defect would cause the defect to get larger, but, since tungsten collects atoms much faster as it gets hotter, it causes the defect to get smaller quicker.
in the meantime the increased heat at that spot would produce more photons.
But it's temporary. It only lasts as long as the defect remains unrepaired.
So. Making the filament lumpy deliberately will make it brighter, but that will start the self-repair process, which won't take long to complete. Meaning you spent a very expensive process step to create a "more efficient" light bulb that over a few minutes or hours becomes just another light bulb.
Tennessee and Bourbon are similar, but Tennessee has had an extra filtering through sugar maple charcoal.
George Dickel and Jack Daniels are the only two companies making it (that I know of; there's probably a boutique brand or two).
Every other grain whiskey made in America can call itself Bourbon if it doesn't want to call itself something more particular. It certainly doesn't have to come from Bourbon county.
You can stand by it, but you might want to say it's not yours if the cops ask.
The yeast in a bottled wine or beer is generally dead (having poisoned itself by making so much alcohol) and/or filtered out. The changes over time in the bottle are not dependent on them but on the other impurities (aka flavor molecules) in them.
Whiskies are not purified like vodkas. They have oils and complex molecules that can change over time. Especially if the bottle is opened, partially emptied (preferably drunk), closed, and left on the shelf for years. Oxygen likes to alter everything.
Bushmill's is a bit pedestrian, but Black Bush is excellent pedestrian.
I got a bottle of Redbreast a while back. It's got an interesting character with some twist and depth, unlike the clear, single-note character that most Irish brands seek.
The story goes (and I have reason to think it's not entirely apocryphal) that Redbreast is what the blenders at Bushmill's drink when they're off work.
"I'm, might be fooled between the Lagavulin and Laphroig,"
Arrgh!
You had me nodding and going "yep, yep, yep," until you stumbled over yer kilt right there.
They may be similar types, but they're an order of magnitude different in smokiness (albeit in the way that a billion is an order of magnitude different from 10 billion...pretty hard to make out from the common perspective of the mid-thousands...)
The EU's economic competition regulators are neophytes compared to those in the U.S., and have been completely snowed by AMD's mischaracterization of Intel's rebate program.
The result will be that prices in the EU are artificially inflated by a lack of actual competition between manufacturers.
This sort of thing can go on for decades, draining the European economy until it simply evaporates.
Intel wasn't actually convicted of abusing its monopoly status. It wasn't a monopoly. And it wasn't convicted.
It settled with an economic commission (none of these things are courts) and at that point decided it was cheaper to pay the fine (less than $50 million; about an hour's pay to Intel) than to fight it in a court.
In the settlement Intel admits no wrongdoing, and the Japanese assert none.
The license is confidential, so what we know is that Intel claims AMD has breached the license, and AMD claims they haven't.
Intel asked AMD a couple of months ago to agree to make the license public so that this would not be ambiguous to anyone.
AMD refused.
Intel knows what is in the license and wants you to know. AMD knows what is in the license and does not want you to know.
There is enough that is public to show that GlobalFoundries is not a subsidiary of AMD. The confidential portion would have to do with the percentage of x86 CPUs AMD can outsource to companies that are not subsidiaries. That is why Intel says the breached portion is confidential.
AMD has been a bad actor for almost its entire relationship with Intel and x86. The GlobalFoundries spinoff exists only to (a) placate the Arabs AMD screwed a year before in a bad stock issue that tanked; and (b) keep the foundries from being seized by creditors when the rest of AMD goes bankrupt.
You can bet when the creditors show up AMD will be showing them documents stating that GlobalFoundries is not a subsidiary but a fully severed company in which AMD is merely a minority shareholder.
The original license was for the original microcodes that AMD was given as part of AMD and Intel's original second-source partnership, and for all derivatives AMD made from that.
Since all AMD x86 designs are tainted by that original copyright, even if AMD no longer uses any of the original circuits or microcode, AMD can never make an x86 of any kind unless they pay Intel and get Intel's permission.
Intel licensed x86 to AMD originally because Intel was unable to keep up with demand.
When Intel decided to end that relationship, AMD refused to stop making x86's, and sued Intel to keep the right to do so.
AMD actually LOST that case, but AMD and Intel were told by the courts to make a license that worked, and AMD was forced to pay Intel for court costs. They renewed the license in 2001.
AMD has now breached the license. Intel has no responsibility to keep AMD in business. Intel can get another foundry to make x86 CPUs. There's no law against being a monopoly.
No. Like most geek cultures, they're merely ignorant of the option to be cool.
You'd think being the person everyone is coming to for the 100-inch 120-Hz 1080p Plasma HDTVs would provide sufficient self-esteem to allay the need to force your will on people.
Um, the Iraqis killing the other Iraqis were not necessarily doing it for Islamic reasons.
Iraq was secular under Saddam.
Since Bush attacked, 90-95% of the Christians have fled and Islamic law has been incorporated into the Iraqi constitution.
Certain brands of fundamentalist religion are death cults and/or totalitarian political organizations. The fact that some pray in mosques vs. churches vs. synagogues is not a deciding factor.
We won so easily in Afghanistan that PNAC dug up their Iraq attack plan (well, dug up is an overstatement; it was on Bush's desk on 1/21/2001, 9/11 just gave them the political muscle to implement it) and we went and fought a bigger war just because we like the explosions.
And by "we" I mean the maniacal criminals we just kicked out of Washington.
Hopefully the DOJ is investigating the entire bunch and making stacks of case folders ready for indictments.
Slashdot Mirror
How can they be sure they got accurate results?
Q: Did you have sex with this woman?
A: Yes.
Q: How much seminal fluid was there?
A: Uh, a lot. Yeah. I'm like a ThirstBuster nozzle on game day.
Q: Did you find her attractive?
A: N-- uh, what? Of course! I dig hunches.
Yeah, but not to your eyes.
Bill and Paul made about $100 billion and their bugs have become the standard that most "standards" can't dislodge.
Anyone can proclaim a "standard", recall what "RFC" stands for? It's not "peer-reviewed and passed by governing bodies."
If Mozilla is saying this is how they're building it into the code base, W3C can ignore it, but it's W3C who won't be compatible with what is standard.
yeah, but on the toyota, there are no screws visible (when the panel is not in place and covering the mount)
Sigs are appended by the feds, and contain steganographic tracking info.
The reason tungsten filaments have any appreciable lifetime at all, instead of just vaporizing themselves like carbon or nickel or any of the other 5,997 materials eventually rejected, is that tungsten filaments self-repair any imperfections.
If a pit forms in the filament surface, the convexities start to ablate into a vapor, and the concavities start to collect atoms from the vapor. The crater becomes a depression, then a dip, then disappears.
In other materials the concentration of electric current and resultant heating around the defect would cause the defect to get larger, but, since tungsten collects atoms much faster as it gets hotter, it causes the defect to get smaller quicker.
in the meantime the increased heat at that spot would produce more photons.
But it's temporary. It only lasts as long as the defect remains unrepaired.
So. Making the filament lumpy deliberately will make it brighter, but that will start the self-repair process, which won't take long to complete. Meaning you spent a very expensive process step to create a "more efficient" light bulb that over a few minutes or hours becomes just another light bulb.
Tennessee and Bourbon are similar, but Tennessee has had an extra filtering through sugar maple charcoal.
George Dickel and Jack Daniels are the only two companies making it (that I know of; there's probably a boutique brand or two).
Every other grain whiskey made in America can call itself Bourbon if it doesn't want to call itself something more particular. It certainly doesn't have to come from Bourbon county.
You can stand by it, but you might want to say it's not yours if the cops ask.
The yeast in a bottled wine or beer is generally dead (having poisoned itself by making so much alcohol) and/or filtered out. The changes over time in the bottle are not dependent on them but on the other impurities (aka flavor molecules) in them.
Whiskies are not purified like vodkas. They have oils and complex molecules that can change over time. Especially if the bottle is opened, partially emptied (preferably drunk), closed, and left on the shelf for years. Oxygen likes to alter everything.
Bushmill's is a bit pedestrian, but Black Bush is excellent pedestrian.
I got a bottle of Redbreast a while back. It's got an interesting character with some twist and depth, unlike the clear, single-note character that most Irish brands seek.
The story goes (and I have reason to think it's not entirely apocryphal) that Redbreast is what the blenders at Bushmill's drink when they're off work.
"I'm, might be fooled between the Lagavulin and Laphroig,"
Arrgh!
You had me nodding and going "yep, yep, yep," until you stumbled over yer kilt right there.
They may be similar types, but they're an order of magnitude different in smokiness (albeit in the way that a billion is an order of magnitude different from 10 billion...pretty hard to make out from the common perspective of the mid-thousands...)
The EU's economic competition regulators are neophytes compared to those in the U.S., and have been completely snowed by AMD's mischaracterization of Intel's rebate program.
The result will be that prices in the EU are artificially inflated by a lack of actual competition between manufacturers.
This sort of thing can go on for decades, draining the European economy until it simply evaporates.
But Intel isn't dropping prices below cost. AMD is.
Intel is dropping costs and passing the savings on to volume customers.
One of those customers chooses to work only with Intel, and AMD claims that is prima-facie evidence that Intel is abusing AMD.
The fact is, AMD sucks at this whole thing, to the point they got completely out of the chip-making business last month.
Someone set us up the spambot.
Spam was way down most of this year, until yesterday. Then it shot back up to where it was last year.
Clearly someone tagged 4/1 as the day to start the spambots back up. Whether this is directly related to the conficker thing I couldn't tell.
Dai-sy
Dai-sy
Give me your an-swer true...
Dumb-ass moderators who identify with the "fanboy" comment and lament their years of fealty to a lie.
Intel wasn't actually convicted of abusing its monopoly status. It wasn't a monopoly. And it wasn't convicted.
It settled with an economic commission (none of these things are courts) and at that point decided it was cheaper to pay the fine (less than $50 million; about an hour's pay to Intel) than to fight it in a court.
In the settlement Intel admits no wrongdoing, and the Japanese assert none.
The license is confidential, so what we know is that Intel claims AMD has breached the license, and AMD claims they haven't.
Intel asked AMD a couple of months ago to agree to make the license public so that this would not be ambiguous to anyone.
AMD refused.
Intel knows what is in the license and wants you to know. AMD knows what is in the license and does not want you to know.
There is enough that is public to show that GlobalFoundries is not a subsidiary of AMD. The confidential portion would have to do with the percentage of x86 CPUs AMD can outsource to companies that are not subsidiaries. That is why Intel says the breached portion is confidential.
AMD has been a bad actor for almost its entire relationship with Intel and x86. The GlobalFoundries spinoff exists only to (a) placate the Arabs AMD screwed a year before in a bad stock issue that tanked; and (b) keep the foundries from being seized by creditors when the rest of AMD goes bankrupt.
You can bet when the creditors show up AMD will be showing them documents stating that GlobalFoundries is not a subsidiary but a fully severed company in which AMD is merely a minority shareholder.
What color is the sand you have your head in?
The original license was for the original microcodes that AMD was given as part of AMD and Intel's original second-source partnership, and for all derivatives AMD made from that.
Since all AMD x86 designs are tainted by that original copyright, even if AMD no longer uses any of the original circuits or microcode, AMD can never make an x86 of any kind unless they pay Intel and get Intel's permission.
You are apparently ignorant of history.
Intel licensed x86 to AMD originally because Intel was unable to keep up with demand.
When Intel decided to end that relationship, AMD refused to stop making x86's, and sued Intel to keep the right to do so.
AMD actually LOST that case, but AMD and Intel were told by the courts to make a license that worked, and AMD was forced to pay Intel for court costs. They renewed the license in 2001.
AMD has now breached the license. Intel has no responsibility to keep AMD in business. Intel can get another foundry to make x86 CPUs. There's no law against being a monopoly.
Natural law is against being a failure like AMD.
AMD had to push out its GPU-as-CPU plans by two years because apparently $5.4 billion didn't buy them enough technology and talent to get it done.
AMD explicitly organized the board structure of GlobalFoundries to try to get around the agreement.
But the ownership structure of AMD means that AMD is no longer in control of the foundries used to make the majority of x86 products.
AMD's response today is also blatantly evasive.
Intel is going to let the courts dismantle AMD.
This is not aggression on Intel's part. AMD signed an agreement and then breached it egregiously.
There's nothing AMD can do to stop that except to agree not to use GlobalFoundries to make x86 chips.
There's nothing AMD fanboys can do to stop it period.
No. Like most geek cultures, they're merely ignorant of the option to be cool.
You'd think being the person everyone is coming to for the 100-inch 120-Hz 1080p Plasma HDTVs would provide sufficient self-esteem to allay the need to force your will on people.
Um, the Iraqis killing the other Iraqis were not necessarily doing it for Islamic reasons.
Iraq was secular under Saddam.
Since Bush attacked, 90-95% of the Christians have fled and Islamic law has been incorporated into the Iraqi constitution.
Certain brands of fundamentalist religion are death cults and/or totalitarian political organizations. The fact that some pray in mosques vs. churches vs. synagogues is not a deciding factor.
This is the truth.
We won so easily in Afghanistan that PNAC dug up their Iraq attack plan (well, dug up is an overstatement; it was on Bush's desk on 1/21/2001, 9/11 just gave them the political muscle to implement it) and we went and fought a bigger war just because we like the explosions.
And by "we" I mean the maniacal criminals we just kicked out of Washington.
Hopefully the DOJ is investigating the entire bunch and making stacks of case folders ready for indictments.